The Catholic Message Board

On Saturday, the president of the Mormon Church, Russell M Nelson, died at age 101.

Due to the weird rules that govern succession, the next president is always the one with the greatest seniority. What this means in practical terms is that by the time an "apostle" is in line to become the next president, he is very old, usually in his 90s, and often sickly and even in the throes of dementia, while in office.

The next in line? Dallin Oaks, who is the ripe young age of only 93.

Looking at this, I see the wisdom of the rule denying cardinals age 80 and over the right to vote in a conclave.

Imagine if this rule didn't exist, and the Pope couldn't appoint a new cardinal until one of the current cardinals died, and then at a conclave to elect a new Pope, all the Cardinals were of extreme old age, with the youngest of he cardinals in the conclave being 86.

What a disaster that would be!

You make a good point. HST, applying LDS practice to the Church, even in analogy, seems a bit far fetched. The LDS church does a number of unusual things, but they seem to be thriving in a culture which would destroy them. Witness the recent attack on the LDS meetinghouse in Michigan where displeasure toward the Mormons was expressed by shooting, burning, and car smashing.

In my early youth, I lived in a solid LDS community and found the experience pleasant ... except for the isolation, being non-LDS. After secular modernity takes out the Mormons, who is next? The Church and the Fundamentalists are under constant attack. Elimination could be by fire or by marching through the institution of religion ... much like the mainstream Protestants.

Except that it is not that different, before Paul VI imposed the over 80 rule, it was not common to appoint new Cardinals, the Church was already in danger of becoming a gerontocracy, and imposing the rule appears to have been done for political reasons, so that he could force out the few remaining Cardinals left over from Pius XII, all over 80, who were serving as obstacles to his agenda. But it has had the effect of making sure that the Church would always be injected with new blood, and preventing the Church from becoming a gerontocracy, like the Mormon Church or the Watchtower Society, both of which are run by old, old, old men, age 90 and older.

The Catholic Church has 118 Cardinals over 80 and that includes 28 in their 90s and 1 age 100.
With better medical care that number can only increase over time.
The age 80 non voting rule is sound.

aussie_aussie_oi_oi wrote: ↑Wed Oct 01, 2025 5:55 pm The Catholic Church has 118 Cardinals over 80 and that includes 28 in their 90s and 1 age 100.

Part of that is due to the practice of giving the red hat to 80+ clerics as an honorific though. If over 80s could vote then that wouldn't happen.

Can't help but think there is a "middle road." While we don't want anyone with dementia, some older folks have a great deal of wisdom and patience. Shame to lose that just because of one's advanced age.

Peetem wrote: ↑Thu Oct 09, 2025 11:00 am Can't help but think there is a "middle road." While we don't want anyone with dementia, some older folks have a great deal of wisdom and patience. Shame to lose that just because of one's advanced age.

You don't lose anything, you just make sure that the very old are not considered eligible to be Pope.

But they are still eligible (in theory)

peregrinator wrote: ↑Mon Oct 13, 2025 6:18 am But they are still eligible (in theory)

Yeah, but only slightly more than you and I are. Realistically, the conclave would have to be deadlocked for weeks or months before they considered anyone not in the conclave, and that hasn't happpened in centuries.

Cardinals over 80, who are healthy enough to travel, can attend all the pre-conclave meetings, which are extremely important in determining the out of the conclave, and can publish and promote their views as much as they like. Walter Kasper, at 81, had inordinate influence over the 2014 Synod on the Family, to the consternation of many.

Kasper should never have been made a Cardinal

If the Pope had complete freedom to choose anyone he wanted, he probably would never have been made bishop. But a Pope has to choose from what is possible, but for bishops and cardinals. Often, the choices are not between good bishops and bad bishops, but between bad bishops, really bad bishops, horrible bishops, diabolical bishops, and catastrophic bishops. In which case, bad may be the best you can get. Given the generally poor state of the German Church, I think sometimes the Pope considers himself lucky if you can find a candidate for Cardinal who at least believes in the existence of God.

I really don't think John Paul II had to name 44 Cardinals in the 2001 consistory (Kasper was one of these, as were Lehmann, Bergoglio, McCarrick, and Rodriguez Maradiaga). In fact, he announced an initial 37 (one of whom was Kasper) and then made a separate announcement with seven more (one of whom was Lehmann), two of whom he had named in pectore 3 years prior. So there was considerable weirdness about this one.